Last week, a Swedish government inquiry tasked with proposing new policies which would “powerfully stimulate” the voluntary return of immigrants advised the government against increasing the so-called emigration grants from today’s 10,000 kronor to the Danish level of about 150,000 kronor, arguing the risks outweighed the benefits. 

Nima Gholam Ali Pour, a Sweden Democrat member of parliament who works alongside the party’s immigration spokesperson Ludvig Aspling, said that the party rejected the conclusions of the Inquiry on Return Emigration and would push the government to enact the policy, calling it “the only viable option for those who do not wish to become part of the Swedish society”.

“A proposal is being developed by the Swedish government offices and it’s going to happen in some way,” he told The Local. “We are not going to follow what the inquiry chair has proposed and now we’re negotiating with the government parties over what will be in the proposal.” 

He said that re-emigration was a core part of the far-right party’s vision for a new national immigration policy, much of which is being put into place under the Tidö Agreement – the Sweden Democrats’ collaboration agreement with the governing parties.  

READ ALSO:

• Inquiry rejects the idea of paying immigrants to return

“The Sweden Democrats believe that there will always be some immigrants who regret their decision to move to Sweden, just as there are many who integrate successfully into the Swedish society,” Ali Pour, himself an immigrant from Iran, said. 

“Those who wish to return need the support and proper conditions from society to do so, rather than being left in permanent marginalisation. Returning to one’s home country is the best outcome for both the individual immigrant if he is dissatisfied and marginalised and for society as a whole.” 

Ali Pour criticised the inquiry’s chair, the economist Joakim Ruist, saying he had failed to provide support for the central claim that raising the emigration grant to 150,000 kronor would make immigrants feel unwelcome and so further deter them from integrating in Swedish society and possibly even push them into crime. 

“This assumption is not substantiated by the inquiry itself and lacks empirical support,” said Ali Pour. “In Denmark, a higher returns allowance has not hindered integration.” 

He said the alternative to stimulating the return of immigrants who have failed to integrate was “migrants living in parallel communities”, which he said was “not an acceptable alternative for the Sweden Democrats”.